Emrit v. Combs et al
| Ronald Satish Emrit |
| Sean P. Diddy Combs, Bad Boy Entertainment and Atlantic Records |
| 3:2024cv00048 |
| January 12, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Maria E Garcia |
| Jeffrey A Meyer |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Other Contract |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 14, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER OF DISMISSAL. On January 8, 2024, the Court entered an order to show cause why the action should not be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B). The Court required plaintiff to file any response to the order to show cause by January 30, 2024. Plaintiff has not filed a response to the Courts order to show cause. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the action for the reasons stated in its order to show cause. To be sure, plaintiff has since filed a notice of appeal from the Court's order to show cause, and the usual rule is that the filing of a notice of appeal divests a district court of jurisdiction over matters within the scope of the notice of appeal. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982). But this rule is subject to exception for a frivolous appeal. See Carroll v. Trump, 2023 WL 5312894, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. 2023); United States v. Rodgers, 101 F.3d 247, 251 (2d Cir. 1996). Plaintiff's appeal from the Court's issuance of an order to show cause is frivolous because an order to show cause is not a final order that may be appealed. The Clerk of Court shall close this case. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 2/14/2024.(Lewis, D)
|
| JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS SURVEY - FOR COUNSEL ONLY: The following link to the confidential survey requires you to log into CM/ECF for SECURITY purposes. Once in CM/ECF you will be prompted for the case number. Although you are receiving this survey through CM/ECF, it is hosted on an independent website called SurveyMonkey. Once in SurveyMonkey, the survey is located in a secure account. The survey is not docketed and it is not sent directly to the judge. To ensure anonymity, completed surveys are held up to 90 days before they are sent to the judge for review. We hope you will take this opportunity to participate, please click on this link: https://ecf.ctd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Dispatch.pl?survey (Lewis, D) |
| Filing 10 CLERK'S CERTIFICATE RE: INDEX AND RECORD ON APPEAL re: #9 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal. The attached docket sheet is hereby certified as the entire Index/Record on Appeal in this matter and electronically sent to the Court of Appeals, with the exception of any manually filed documents as noted below. Dinah Milton Kinney, Clerk. Documents manually filed not included in this transmission: none (Chartier, A.) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL as to 8 Order to Show Cause, by Ronald Satish Emrit. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Chartier, A.) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED. Plaintiff is a citizen of Florida who has filed this action for $45 million against three defendants: Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, Bad Boy Entertainment, and Atlantic Records. The complaint alleges three causes of action for public nuisance, tortious interference with business relations, and products liability. This Court has authority to review and dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint if it is "frivolous or malicious," or if it otherwise "fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted," or if it "seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B). A complaint may also be dismissed if it indisputably alleges a cause of action that is time-barred by the statute of limitations. See Pino v. Ryan, 49 F.3d 51, 5354 (2d Cir. 1995). It appears from the Court's review that the complaint is subject to dismissal. First, the complaint does not allege facts to plausibly suggest that defendant Combs is a public nuisance or that any alleged nuisance activities of Combs have injured plaintiff. Second, the complaint does not allege facts to plausibly suggest that any of the defendants have tortiously interfered with plaintiff's contractual or business rights. Third, apart from plaintiff's objection to Combs' alleged billboard advertisements for a brand of vodka, the complaint does not allege any kind of defect with respect to a product as required to sustain a products liability claim. Moreover, to the extent that the complaint lists dates, all of the relevant events occurred ten or more years ago, such that it appears that the statute of limitations has expired for any of plaintiff's claims. Plaintiff alleges no facts that would support equitable tolling of the statute of limitations. Lastly, the complaint does not allege any facts to suggest any connection to the District of Connecticut. Federal venue law states in relevant part that a civil action may only be brought in "a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located," or may be brought in "a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated." 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1)-(2). Plaintiff may file any response to this order to show cause on or before January 30, 2024 to explain why this action should not be dismissed. It is so ordered. Show Cause Response due by 1/30/2024 Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 1/18/2024.(Lewis, D)
|
| Filing 4 ENTERED IN ERROR: Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 3/17/2024 Discovery due by 7/18/2024 Dispositive Motions due by 8/22/2024 Signed by Clerk on 1/12/2024.(Chartier, A.) Modified on 1/17/2024 to add Entered in Error for incorrect file date. (Chartier, A.). |
|
Filing 7
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 3/12/2024 Discovery due by 7/13/2024 Dispositive Motions due by 8/17/2024 Signed by Clerk on 1/12/2024.(Chartier, A.)
|
|
Filing 6
Standing Protective Order Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 1/12/2024.(Chartier, A.)
|
|
Filing 5
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 1/12/2024.(Chartier, A.) Modified on 1/17/2024 to correct docket text (Chartier, A.).
|
| Filing 3 Notice: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1, a disclosure statement must be filed with a party's first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the Court and must be supplemented if any required information changes during the case. Signed by Clerk on 1/12/2024.(Chartier, A.) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Ronald Satish Emrit. (Chartier, A.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Atlantic Records, Bad Boy Entertainment, Sean P. Diddy Combs, filed by Ronald Satish Emrit. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Envelope)(Chartier, A.) |
| Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer and Judge Maria E. Garcia added. (Freberg, B) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
